3 ms·
C and Rust both tend to be more sane than C++, though, so you can't just pin it on C++ being a systems programming language.
by creata 1y ago
C and Rust both tend to be more sane than C++, though, so you can't just pin it on C++ being a systems programming language.
- pjmlp 1y agoAgree with Rust, with C, only when people think they know C, but never opened a page of ISO C, or spent afternoons reading compiler manuals about language extensions and implementation specific behaviors.
- tialaramex 1y agoI spent about two decades getting paid to write C before I learned Rust so I feel confident describing myself as an expert. It's true that C's abstract machine is a much stranger thing than many of its proponents believe - and that it's not very like any computer built this century so that the "portable assembler" claims are plain delusional, but I will say it's definitely less crazy than C++, more sane if you will. This has become a bit less true in C17 and C23, but a lot of that is driven by the urge from WG21 (the C++ committee) to have WG14 (C language) do their work for them, hopefully some WG14 members will push back against that.
- pjmlp 1y agoAgreed, now if WG14 actually cared about sensible improvements regarding strings and arrays. As for latest ISO C revisions, not sure if it is doing any WG21 work other that the whole #embed drama, rather it looks to me pushing for a C++ without Classes, with a much worse design, e.g. _Generic.